Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
Leeham News and Analysis
- Boeing wants to remarket China’s airplanes. It’s costly and time consuming. April 28, 2025
- Bjorn’s Corner: Air Transport’s route to 2050. Part 19. April 25, 2025
- How good is the C929? Part 2. April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results Update: China is 10% of the backlog, with 500 in “Unidentified” April 24, 2025
- Boeing First Quarter Results: Tariffs, Return flights, $10.55bn asset sale April 23, 2025
Farnborough: CFM, PW engage in hand-to-hand combat
We’re all used to Airbus and Boeing engaging in hand-to-hand combat. The war has now spilled over to CFM and Pratt & Whitney and the LEAP engine vs the GTF.
There have always been some sharp words. But according to these two stories from Guy Norris at Aviation Week, the tone has now gotten even sharper.
CFM claims big advantage over GTF.
We’re puzzled by CFM’s claim (in the first story) that the LEAP will have a 2%-2.5% advantage in fuel burn over the GTF. Airbus gives a 1.5% advantage to GTF because of the larger fan (John Leahy, Credit Suisse conference Nov. 30, 2011). CFM claims a 15% SFC gain over today’s engines; PW claims 16% SFC gains (pre-installation) for its GTF and flying test results bear this out, PW says.
CFM has a larger market share of aircraft over 100 seats, because of its exclusivity on the 737 MAX. CFM also has a larger share of the A320neo family, the only airplane where there is head-to-head competition, bolstered by the policy of sister company, lessor GECAS, of buying only GE engines; and a financial rescue of Frontier Airlines, which has a CFM-powered A320 fleet and which ordered the A319neo/320neo at the Paris Air Show last year with LEAP engines.
It’s noteworthy in the first article that the LEAP-1B for the 737 MAX shares little commonality with the LEAP-1A and LEAP-1C. This reflects the challenges of fitting a LEAP under the wings of the physically-constrained 737, which basically required another core design.
Separately, here is a story about the materials and process used for the LEAP.
Farnborough underway with CFM press conference
Tweets from Saturday’s CFM press conference:
Bernie Baldwin @BernieBaldwin
#FARN12 #FIA12 @CFM_engines Part commonality between LEAP-1A and LEAP-1B very little.
CFM: 737 Max Leap-1B engine core has 10-stage 22:1 pressure ratio in the HPC. 1st 5 stages are blisks. Plans 5-stage LPT. #FIA12
Bernie Baldwin @BernieBaldwin
#FARN12 #FIA12 @CFM_engines doesn’t see a commercial use of open rotor technology in the thrust range where CFM sits now until about 2030.
Another shot from @CFM_engines: Each Leap-powered A320neo will have $3-$4M net present value advantage on 15yr term against A320neo w/PW1200
Bernie Baldwin @BernieBaldwin
#FARN12, #FIA12 @CFM_engines LEAP-1A/1C design freeze took place on 28 June 2012, drawings now being released. -1B freeze will be mid 2013.
Interesting: @CFM_engines predicts Leap-1A will beat PW1200 on MX by 50h/yr on A320neo. Also 4 fewer “fill-ups”. #FARN12 #FIA12
Looks like @CFM_engines expects CFM56 production to phase out completely by 2019, meaning no more A320neos & 737NGs. #FIA12 #FARN12
Here is a full story from The Wall Street Journal. Author Jon Ostrower also posted the following image on his Facebook account:
Farnborough Air Show preview
Overview
This is really expected to be a boring show from the perspective of orders. Airbus has been downplaying expectations following last year’s Paris Air Show blow-out of more than 1,200 A320neo orders. How can you match that? The answer is, Airbus can’t.
Boeing will certainly firm up hundreds of 737 MAX commitments, so this will be Boeing’s show. And there is the buzz that Boeing is partnering with Lockheed Martin and NASA (oh, another government subsidy?) to produce a 2,500 mph SST, with details supposed to come at the Air Show. Then there is the leak that the 787 will fly there, the first time in 28 years Boeing has an aerial flying display.
We’ve talked with several journalists and industry personnel who are skipping the Air Show this year. So are we, and we’ve been at the Farnborough and Paris air shows since 2008. We just don’t expect enough news this year that we can’t get from the press releases.
So here are our expectations for the show:
787 fuel burn, GEnx and how it relates to LEAP-1B
787 fuel burn: Aviation Week has this story about the early fuel burn results for the Boeing 787 beating expectations (which admittedly were tamped down because of the program difficulties). Some of this has been reported before. What caught our eye was the detail about the GEnx engine. Why? Because the CFM LEAP-1B derives much of its technology from the GEnx, including the higher temperatures fleetingly referenced in the AvWeek piece.
CFM is relying on high temperatures to achieve the fuel burn required by Boeing’s 737 MAX. This is hotly debated (pun intended) between CFM and Pratt & Whitney in the competition between the LEAP and the PW GTF.
CFM advocates that its hotter-running engine, equipped with advanced technology ceramics and other advanced materials, gives it the advantage over PW’s Geared Turbo Fan technology. PW argues that the hotter CFM engine will require more maintenance. Engineers that we ask generally agree that the hotter temperature approach will be a challenge for long-term maintenance but fall back on CFM’s sterling reputation of reliability as a measure of comfort. At the same time, these same engineers–who have no connection to either CFM or PW–like the GTF technology but want to see it proved in service.
Steven Udvar-Hazy said it best. It will be five to seven years after the engines are in service before the industry knows the reliability and performance of either engine’s advanced technology.
Odds and Ends: MAX EIS dates; McNerney on business climate; A320 Tianjin plant only breaks even
MAX EIS dates: Aviation Week has this story that lists the planned MAX EIS dates: 737-8, 2017 (we previously reported 4Q2017); 737-9 in 2018 and 737-7 in 2019. AvWeek also reported the bypass ratio for the LEAP-1B is 8.5:1.
Eulogy for the 747-400: Bloomberg has this interesting piece about the current status of the Boeing 747-400.
McNerney on US business climate: Boeing CEO Jim McNerney has these comments on the US business climate.
Airbus Tianjin plant only breaks even: so says this report in Aviation Week.
US Air’s 1549 A320 now in museum: It’s a tribute to the flight crew and to aviation safety.
Comparing Neo, Ceo, NG and MAX
As Airbus and Boeing battle for orders for the current generation A320 and 737 families and for the re-engined models, comparisons between the four sets of aircraft has been difficult to come by.
Furthermore, with Boeing continuing to evolve the MAX–not only with the engine specifications but also the airplane weights–ambiguity sometimes dominates.
Boeing continues to talk with customers about the definition of the MAX, with higher weights under study. Airbus is more advanced, but of course until flight testing confirms figures, nothing is certain.
Over time, information as emerged through Airbus, Boeing, Pratt & Whitney and other statements and information. Aspire Aviation (now Orient Insight) also has been a solid source of information. Our own data gathering has obtained some solid information as well.
From all these sources, we’ve put together the following table. The 737-7 MAX is the murkiest, with little apparent interest so far from the customer base. Taking known facts for the 8/9 MAX, we estimated some of the specifications for the 7 MAX.
What struck us on the NEO is that Airbus specifications for range are greater than has been previously revealed.
We consider the specifications of NEO and MAX still evolving until flight tests for all six sub-types prove design goals.
Click to enlarge and use zoom-in or magnifier to enlarge further for fine print.
More on the changes to the CFM LEAP-1B
As we reported earlier today, Boeing and CFM didn’t stop with the previously announced 68.4 inch fan for the LEAP-1B engine on the 737 MAX.
Buckingham Research, citing Boeing at the investors’ day, wrote that Boeing talked about a 70 inch fan. Jon Ostrower–now at the Wall Street Journal–confirmed the larger fan, but at 69.4 inches (70 inches apparently was a rounded number) as well as pursuit of a smaller core.
The smaller core is important for two reasons: a larger fan and a smaller core provide for a higher by-pass ratio, increasing fuel burn reduction performance. The smaller core also enabled the engine to be mounted closer to the wing, which in turn means the previously announced 8 inch nose gear extension remains valid.
70″ Fan for the 737 MAX
We picked up information that Boeing’s announcement at ISTAT in March that it had settled on a 68.4 inch fan for the 737 MAX LEAP-1B wasn’t a done deal. Now Buckingham Research comes out of Tuesday’s Boeing’s investors’ day with this notation:
A 70” fan for the 737MAX
BA noted that 737MAX development is proceeding on schedule with firm configuration expected in 2013 and first flight in 2016. Further, BA sees more upside than downside risk to the plane’s 13% efficiency improvement. BA is now looking at a slightly larger 70” fan for the LEAP-X engine vs. 68.4″ previously. While that might reinforce investor concerns regarding the GE LEAP-X engine performance, we see the change as part of the design optimization process. A number of factors impact engine fan size, including drag (larger engine fans have more drag), bypass ratio, core size, core temperature, etc. With the 737MAX recently undergoing wind tunnel testing, we think the revised engine fan size has more to do with optimizing the engine than a means to overcome performance deficiencies.
Note that this is not speculation on Buckingham’s part; it cites Boeing as the source.
Odds and Ends: Boeing revises MAX winglet, adding 1.5% to efficiency
Update, 2:15 PM PDT: Airbus issued this response to the Boeing development:
“This kind of split-tip device was among the options we studied for the A320 Family, and we decided instead to advance with our Sharklet design as the most efficient. Our Sharklet figures (3.5% improvement over the already-efficient A320 wing with wing-tip fences) are flight-test proven.”
Original Post:
Boeing today announced a revised winglet to add 1.5% in fuel efficiency for the 737 MAX, releasing a photo. See here. This will be on top of the advertised 10%12% fuel burn gain previously announced.
Separately, David Hess, CEO of Pratt & Whitney, told the PW media day “that as far as we know, the 737 MAX is not an opportunity for us,” citing the Boeing-CFM exclusivity agreement.
Update, 0900 PDT: Boeing held a tele-press conference to discuss the new “Boeing Advanced Technology Winglets,” (BATW) which it also called “dual feathered” winglets.
Boeing said this is an exclusive Boeing design and not derived from a similar design promoted by Aviation Partners. Key points:
- Up to 1.5% lower fuel burn, depending on the length of mission;
- The design used Computational Fluid Dynamics to design it, a process used from the 787/747-8 programs;
- This is completely new technology, not having roots to the MD-11 which has a similar-looking wingtip arrangement;
- The wingspan is increased by only “inches” compared with the NG;
- The BATW is likely scalable to larger aircraft;
- There are no current plans to make the BATW available on the NG, though this could change;
- Although there will be some benefit to range, the BATW isn’t significant;
- Boeing now claims 18% better all-in costs than the current Airbus A320 (based on figures as a starting point Airbus disputes);
- This just about does it for aerodynamic changes to the 737; architectural changes should be nailed down in the third or fourth quarter; and
- “Our major trades aerodynamically are done.”
Aviation Partners has a similar concept; the differences between Boeing and AP are evident.
Here’s how McDonnell Douglas executed a similar concept on the MD-11:
